Heritage Committee - 5 October 2023

Don't press that button. The moral of the story Welcome everyone to the Heritage Committee meeting for the 5th of October 2023. I'm Councillor Daniell Wheeler. I'm the Chair of the Committee. I'd like to begin by acknowledging that Hawkesbury Council is on the lands of the Dharug and Darkinjung people, the traditional custodians of the Hawkesbury, and pay my respects to Elders past, present and emerging and acknowledge all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the first people of this country and acknowledge that we are on unceded land wherever we are in Australia. I pay my personal respects to all First Nations people joining us today.

Committee members and members of the public attending the meeting are advised that in the event of an emergency you'll be asked to proceed in an orderly manner to the nearest exit following the guidance of the warden.

This meeting is recorded and will be available to the public. In terms of privacy and personal information protection, the recording may involve recording of personal information provided at the time of the meeting. Recordings are made to assist staff in compiling the minutes of the meeting and to enable podcasting of Council Committee meetings. The provision of any information that is recorded is voluntary. If you don't wish to be recorded, you should not address or request to address the meeting. Recordings may be made available to other people where such access is in accordance with the relevant regulations and the recordings are stored in Council's record management system. For the benefit of people who will be addressing the committee, it's expected that you will refrain from making any insult, allegation or personal reflection against any person present or not at this meeting.

This request relates to both your address to the meeting and to any answers given in response to questions from the committee. We've got apologies from Gay, Erin and Cindy. Do we have any other apologies that anyone's aware of?

Also Councillor Redden.

Thank you.

As required by the Code of Conduct, committee members are required to disclose any pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in relation to matters on today's agenda. Does anyone have any interest to disclose? Graham?

Yes, Madam Chair, item 3.1.2, the update of the Hawkesbury timber slab barn study.

Thank you, and I've got a declaration for the same item, the timber slab barn study. Speakers, we'll deal with items that we don't have any registered speakers on items, so we won't be changing the order of the business paper,

And we don't need to worry about attendees. We'll miss that bit.

The minutes from the previous meeting, the 3rd of August 2023, will be included in the 2nd of November business paper, so we'll hold over any minutes until then. So the first item.

Any minutes until then. So the first item is the outstanding actions, item 3.1.1. There's quite a lot of outstanding actions, or quite a lot not necessarily outstanding actions, but a lot of actions to update on. So we might just go through them one by one, where we can roll a couple in together we will, but there's 19. So we'll just work our way through the list, I think, at this stage. So I'll get you to speak to the first one, Andrew, which is the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Study.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So, yeah, the first on the list of outstanding actions from the previous Heritage Committee was the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Study. So that was obviously adopted by Council in October 2021, but there is further work that we're undertaking in terms of looking at the priorities and where the focus is. So that report will come back to this committee for further consideration when those further discussions have occurred.

Thanks. And I think at a previous meeting we resolved for that to go back to the Aboriginal representatives of the committee initially for discussion with their communities before it came back to us for the next round. Does anyone have any questions on that item? Okay, we'll move on then to topic 2, which is the Design Excellence Principles into Council's LEP.

So I guess through the Heritage Committee, there has been calls for Council to include design excellence provisions within the local environmental plan. So that's the statutory document that all development applications have to address. I guess working through the Heritage Committee, but also other stakeholders, we had an LEP DCP reference group as well that provided input in terms of that. And so we do have a design excellence clause that's actually included in the LEP review that Council's undertaking. So Council would formally consider that back in November last year, November 2022. And so that actual planning proposal was with the Department of Planning and Environment for the gateway determination. So subject to the department's successful... Gateway determination, that will then continue in terms of the process to add that design excellence clause to the LEP.

Thanks. So I think that the previous Heritage Advisory Committee received a presentation regarding design excellence principles and what they actually could entail . And I think there was a little bit of confusion at the time, and certainly with Council as well, there was some confusion about whether we could put a blanket design excellence provision in. Unfortunately, the way — and please correct me if I'm wrong — the way the New South Wales legislation works is that design excellence tends to function as a trade-off rather than an overlying principle for an LEP. So we can't sort of say to anybody who puts in a development application or a planning proposal, you must adhere to a design excellence provision, and all your designs must be excellent.

Unfortunately, that is a utopian dream that doesn't exist in the current legislation. What it means, basically, is that people can call on a design excellence principle to be granted potentially additional floor space or an increase in building height or something like that. So it should be viewed as a trade-off rather than an overarching benefit that we can confer on all development that comes to us. Andrew, is it possible for people to view the proposed LEP? The new LEP now?

Yes, obviously part of the business papers from Council's meeting in November last year, it includes the planning proposal document, which includes all the various clauses that are part of that, including the design excellence clause. So we can send the design excellence clause specifically out to committee members if there's interest in sending that out, but it is publicly available.

So if people wanted to have a look at what that actually looks like before it comes back, that would be useful. If we could send that around, that would be helpful, I think. And do we have a timeline from the state government?

I mean, obviously there's quite a number of elements to the Council-led LEP review, and so have been working with the Department of Planning in terms of those various elements, with the aim of having that successful gateway determination issued. It's expected we'll probably be in a position to have that gateway determination prior to the end of 2023.

Okay.

Any questions? Graham?

Yes, Madam Chair. Yes, could I just

Get you to lift your microphone up a little bit? I can't see it past your screen. Thank you.

Okay. I did have the button pressed. Yes, I would certainly like a copy of, if that's possible, Madam Chair, of the design excellence principles. But I also find that what you've just said is pretty disappointing, that Council can't be a leader in asking applicants to actually provide design excellence in every project. And as an architect, I guess I find that boggling and quite disgusting. So I guess— We can't do anything about it, but that's my view. Thanks.

We are in furious agreement. Anyone else? Okay, let's move on to topic three, which is the Hawkesbury Heritage Study. Heritage strategy, sorry

Strategy, yeah, sorry. So what the heritage strategy is, it's basically a requirement from the Department of Planning, who provides grant funding to councils to have basically a three-year rolling program of projects that each council is undertaking. So our current heritage strategy runs from 2021 to 2024. So we'll obviously be starting discussions with this committee in early 2024 in terms of the next three-year program. So it's basically a requirement of the funding that each council has that three-year rolling program. So we're presenting to the committee in terms of what we think are the various projects that need to happen in the next three years to include as part of that next strategy.

And they, to a degree, they guide the directions of the Heritage Committee as well. It might be helpful, I think, to share, I think we did see that early in the piece, it might be helpful if we could share the current strategy again with the committee before we commence discussions in 2024, so that people have got a jumping-off point

Yep. No, we can distribute that to the committee members, yeah.

Any other? Okay, topic four, the state heritage listings.

So this particular one related to the Singleton's Watermill site, and obviously, as we've reported to the committee a couple of meetings back, that has obviously proceeded and is actually state listed. So that matter is completed, yeah.

Right. The brick barrel drains in Richmond. Is everyone aware of the existence of the brick barrel drains in Richmond? Who would like to speak to the background of that?

Graham, would you like to?

Well, I can, Madam Chair, as much as I know. I must say that this all came to the fore when I think it was a development proposal from, I can't think of their name at the moment, Richmond Club, from the Richmond Club, and some archaeologists undertook some work and actually found documentation that included the brick barrel drain, which actually ran down East Market Street, down as far as almost to Frances Street, and then actually went underneath one of the greens of the Richmond Club, and then across Frances Street further to the east, I think. Ian Jack, or former Ian Jack, did actually look at some detailed research, as I understand it, and did think that the drain also turned from the corner of East Market Street and Windsor Street, along Windsor Street in front of Toxana around the theatre.

But that hasn't been fully confirmed. I know council, quite a large brick barrel drain, and council has actually undertaken, I think, some... Time back, a scope of the drain, and it's still there in quite good condition. It's quite a large drain. I guess when, just as an aside, when I first, or Karen and I first bought Toxana, we actually spoke to the Rosoli family who used to live next door at the Richmond Records place. And he used to say to me, this was Kevin Rosoli, the former MP, they used to play in the drain. So it was quite large, and I don't know whether they could stand up in it or whether they just sort of crawled in it in their younger years, but certainly that was a recollection of his, and that's probably as much as I can tell you.

Thanks, Graham. Sorry, go ahead, Jen.

I was just going to add that the map shows, the map from 1840 shows the drain along in front of Toxana, before Toxana was built. So it was owned then by William Bowman's father. And so it predates Toxana according to the map that Ian found.

And Council's got some footage that I think the last committee saw, which was a camera down through the drain, and it's still a functioning drainage system. It's not a relic. It still works as a main part of Richmond's drainage system. So Andrew, I might hand now to you to talk about the next bit.

On the Brickbower Drain? Yes. Yep. So obviously, in terms of the Richmond system, it's obviously those CCTV that has occurred. But there's also obviously those investigations that we discussed with the committee, I think it was the last meeting, in terms of the Windsor site, the drains into South Creek. So there's ongoing investigation in terms of that system and whether it is, you know, the potential for that to be a significant item. So there'll be further reports to the committee in terms of that.

And in the meantime, I think we discussed sending both of those drainage systems to the heritage listings group to add to the probably the third tranche of listings that we don't have easy info for first up.

Okay. Any further questions on the drains, Mary?

Yes. Just what's the likelihood that there are more there in Richmond, more barrel drains in Richmond, and how does that fit in with how we are monitoring the risk of failing infrastructure, which is probably a question for the infrastructure department, but because we know there are drainage issues in other areas of Richmond, is that being monitored and how do we actually ascertain what exactly is under there? Like, what are we doing to monitor that?

So I think there's two questions there. The first one I think is probably worth flagging in the minutes from this committee meeting to come back to Council and then go to the Director of Infrastructure about their place in Council's infrastructure system and how we monitor their function as part of that system. And the next question is, are there likely to be more? I can see Jan's got her light on, and I hope you're going to have a stab at that. Question .

I just wanted to add that there is another drain in the terrace at the bottom of Fitzgerald Street that caved in some years ago when Gary McCully was the general manager , and it's an extensive brick barrel drain too. It was just covered over again. But, you know, if we're going to keep a listing, I think we need to keep a listing because there are obviously lots, but there's one in the terrace in Fitzgerald Street too.

So if we could have that added to the minutes as well and flagged for further discussion and exploration. Graham, did you want to have a stab at whether there's more of that? Does anyone know about that, any more about those, the network of that drainage system?

No, Madam Chair, I can't shed any light on that. But we did actually ask, or this committee did ask, that further investigation during the heritage study with the consultants, who no longer exist, to actually undertake that sort of review specifically for barrel drains in Richmond as well.

So let's also add that as a flag for further investigation as to the extent of that network and a list of other. Brick drainage. That's likely to be confined, I assume, to just Windsor and Richmond. We're not looking at that happening in our other smaller towns.

Madam Chair, the interesting thing here is that if that's going to be investigated through the community heritage study, I'm sure that Council would actually need to engage a historian. I don't think the community can actually come up with those answers. And so part of that study may well need to actually provide some historic input,

Which hopefully, by sending it to the working group initially, we can get some recommendations back from the working group as to next actions. My biggest concern is that I don't want it falling off the radar and us having to have this discussion again in five years' time because we've forgotten about them all again.

Topic six, which is the heritage information sheets.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So we had hoped that we would be able to include a report on this agenda, and we were very close to that in terms of the updated guidelines, and that's basically guidelines to assist heritage property owners to understand, you know, the general issues that happen with heritage items, particularly in terms of roofs and gutters and the types of methods they should employ if they are undertaking maintenance or improvements to their particular heritage items. So we'll actually have something that included on the business papers for our next meeting in November.

Excellent. Any other comment on that?

Good, we'll look forward to that coming back to us. Seven, Hawkesbury birthplace of the fair go.

I guess the reality in terms of this one is that, given our priorities and existing resources, there's no further work that officers have undertaken in terms of that matter to date.

So parking that for the meantime.

Grant funding projects.

So a couple of things here is obviously the potential listings of new items. So there's the working group that's formed and has met to discuss those potential listings. So we're aiming to schedule—we're scheduling another meeting of that working group prior to the end of 2023, and there's a more detailed report in terms of that item further in the business papers. Other grant-funded projects that have now completed, obviously the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Study, the Strategic Conservation Management Plan for cemeteries, the works to individual properties, and yeah, so those particular projects have now wrapped up and finalised.

Questions or

Comments on any of those? Mary? Just a question. It may be naive, but to what period do the potential listings—what period in years does that go up to? And does that get reviewed to extend it so we're then retaining other items that are since been lost and that we might be wishing to retain in a streetscape, for example?

So my understanding is that we've now divided that into three tranches . One is the slab barn study, one is the items that don't have any protection, that we already have a reasonable amount of information from the heritage studies that were done around 2010 and not taken up by Council, and that's the first tranche because that's relatively easy to complete and get those items listed. And they run from quite early items right through to the between the wars period, from memory. I haven't seen all of those listings for a while. Andrew, do you have— unfortunately Christopher is on leave, so he's probably the best acquainted with exactly what's in that.

Yeah, no, exactly as you said, highlighted there is obviously really drawing on the previous heritage studies that Council has undertaken over the years and mining all of those studies for information so that we can move forward with those listings, particularly for the sites that don't have any protection at the moment by having a listing. And they do range, as the Chair has sort of highlighted there, from early colonial periods to around that interwar period, and sort of looking to progress those in sort of tranches with the working group in batches, I guess, of around 10 to 20, that we get feedback from the working group in terms of the draft inventory sheets as they're prepared. Yeah.

And then the third tranche is the ones that we don't have. We know that the item is of heritage merit, but it's— A more lengthy process to gather the information for the inventory sheet.

Graham?

Madam Chair, just talking of the identification of the individual properties, yes, it is disappointing that Council hasn't actually acted on these previous heritage studies. But I just wonder if those particular items that haven't been put on the LEP could actually be flagged when any application comes into Council so that they could actually get due recognition of the work that's already been done, and actually have that as part of the assessment process.

I know it's not within the LEP, and I guess a second part of my thought is that it would have been bloody good if the LEP had have included all of that in the review and not sort of leave it as a next stage. I guess I've said that before, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. But I think if you're doing a review of the LEP, then why wouldn't you include all of those items within it?

Indeed. I know Council does keep a list of potential items and a number of other studies that staff use to flag potential heritage items that are under threat when an application comes to us. The Higginbottom study in Richmond has been used, the archaeological study has been used for the same purpose. The problem, of course, as you well know, is that there's no protection on those, and with the use of private certifiers and complying development certificates, particularly complying development certificates for demolition, Council has no power unless we use an interim order, which is, as we've seen in Windsor with the item in Windsor, quite expensive. So , and then shunts, all the other listings down the track.

And of course the salutary lesson of all of this, which has been pointed out to Council on a couple of occasions now, is that if you don't get the listings sorted early in the piece, then that piecemeal approach leaves things quite vulnerable. But it's also really time-consuming for staff, and it's very expensive in terms of Council resources.

Yes, is the short answer.

Any other comments? Topic nine, the Heritage Awards.

So there was, in the previous term of the Heritage Committee, there was a Heritage Awards working group that had previously prepared the proposal for potential awards program, and that included a photography award. You know, further works, you know, in terms of merits and logistics is required, you know, should an awards program be introduced. I guess mindful that, you know, in terms of resources, there's no sort of allocated funding to that at this stage.

So potential, really the stumbling block here is that Council hasn't allocated any funding towards getting an awards system off the ground. We've got a lot of background work that was done by a working group from the previous Heritage Advisory Committee. It probably wouldn't take a great deal of work if that was handed to, for example, to some sort of collaboration with the events, with Council's events team. It would probably require a recommendation from this group to Council for a funding allocation in next year's budget. That's probably the earliest that it would happen at this stage, and it would be subject to competition for other Council resources. But if you wanted to discuss that further, or you wanted to put up some sort of recommendation, then that would be, it could come back if you wanted more information or a revisit of what was recommended from the previous Heritage Advisory Committee before you wanted to send that back to Council for budget considerations.

We could do that as well. I'll leave that in your hands.

Mary ?

That's a shame, but I'm just wondering. I've got a feeling there used to be a heritage award within the Australia Day Awards some time ago.

There was a, I think there was just an individual award. Yeah, yeah

But there's not even that now, from what I believe. Is there?

No

No. For heritage? I don't think there is. I don't think so. I don't recall. Well, maybe nobody's applied for it, but I do think some...

Oh, okay.

Okay

Yeah, I remember it as a distinct thing some years ago, and I think it is a good way to at least, even if it is only for individuals, a recognition of something like that. But I think it definitely needs, you know, it can tie in with a number of other things if we do have the recognition around these sort of things. The

Aim previously was to have a distinct standalone event with the input from the National Trust and various other groups, local groups, and also as an awareness raising for the community to see the heritage that was in front of them. But Michelle and then Jan.

Just, I've just checked and I think there's the cultural heritage award. Oh, okay. Maybe it hasn't been awarded for

Some time. Maybe we haven't had, if we don't get nominations, we don't

Award. I don't recall it being awarded.

Jan? I'd like to revisit it, Madam Chair, if we could get a report on where we're up to. I can't actually remember, and I think it's a good idea. But I think we need to know exactly where we're up to previously .

So could we have that come back to us to a future meeting in time for us to make a recommendation to the budget for budget discussions if we choose?

Yep. No, we could certainly include a report in the November meeting in terms of the work of the previous working group and the documentation that was produced as part of that , in order to provide that background.

Madam Chair, if I could, I've got something to say there. The previous GM, Peter Conroy, you might recall, promised this meeting that he would actually bring it to the next budget when he was involved, because he thought it was a pretty good idea to actually forward that on. So I guess I'd like to think that the committee could put something to the current GM to see if this sort of thing would be likely to be supported.

So if it comes to the November meeting, we can have a discussion, look at whether you want to put it forward for potential budget consideration, which will start about March next year. That would then come to Council in the minutes of the committee meeting, and then Council would determine whether it wanted it to go to budget discussions. And hopefully that will advance it up the list. And if we don't have any natural disasters between now and the next budget, we might have some funds for something nice for a change.

So how do we come up with some dollars? Because that's what Council is going to be

Looking for. We had dollars in the last, the proposal had dollars in it, and so it wouldn't take much to just update those. I don't think we've got a fair idea of what it costs to run an event, so Council can certainly sort out the rest of that budget. It was a very well developed proposal, so it shouldn't need too much rejigging.

Richmond Bridge duplication program.

So just highlighting here that Austroads Transport for New South Wales have finalised their corridor options report. So that was issued in December 2022. So the corridor is set in terms of that particular project. Obviously the Heritage Committee had provided a lot of input in terms of the various corridor options that did exist whilst Transport for New South Wales were undertaking their investigations. But the actual corridor itself is now set.

Questions or comments?

Liveability. So we've just had an update on the liveability project, and I think, Deb, you're the only one who wasn't in the update. Andrew, do you want to add anything further to this? You weren't in the update

Either.

Narrowly escaped the update. So the committee has asked the Director of Planning a few questions on notice, which will come back to us, and I think we're looking forward to another round of consultation, largely on stage two.

And there was some quite a really useful discussion, I think, around heritage concerns and potential ways forward around the preservation of heritage fabric, particularly. The General Assembly.

So the Ecomos General Assembly, which has obviously occurred in Sydney in September this year, was obviously delayed due to COVID, was supposed to happen, I think, originally back in 2020, is when the original plan was for the General Assembly. So we had actually nominated for a day tour or a side tour to the General Assembly. So we had the Explore Hawkesbury's Heritage Tour. But based on the number of registrations and the delegates who were nominated to undertake that tour, the numbers that we received were very low, and it just was not viable to continue with that tour. So we didn't proceed with that.

So that was a disappointing outcome, I think. It does mean that we've got the plans for that tour available should we decide to, should an opportunity come up where we could run something similar, and we should keep that in mind for other opportunities if anyone comes across those with their various organisations. Graham.

Thanks, Madam Chair. Look, I just wanted to add to that that I had also organised an event specifically for the The NACLA Architecture Committee, or Vernacular Building Committee, that didn't go ahead either. But a request did come through the General Assembly, which Carolyn and I attended, from some Irish delegates, and we did actually bring them out to the Hawkesbury and did do some of that tour that we had organised in conjunction with Council and took these delegates around. And they were, one of the members was a member of International ICOMOS Board, the lady from Ireland, and two colleagues of hers also attended, and the current president of Irish ICOMOS, and another member who I can't recall what her position was.

But we brought them out and went to Hobartville and had a good look round there. We then looked at the cultural landscape that that actually presented, and through along Francis Street in Richmond, overlooking the cultural landscape of, and the flood area of the Hawkesbury River, and then up into the tower of St Matthew's Anglican Church, and the participants were gobsmacked about the actual cultural landscape and the views that they could get in and around the area, which really highlights to me how important we should be considering this cultural landscape that we live in. Unfortunately, you know, we're all fairly familiar with it, and it doesn't sort of rate as highly as it should. But once you actually get delegates from somewhere else to come out and they start talking, then you really realise how special it all is.

And the other thing that came out of that. Small tour was the thought that although Europe has many, many older precincts , there's probably nowhere else in the world that you can actually come back and visit some of Australia's earliest architecture and earliest vernacular buildings, and the Hawkesbury has a lot of it. So again, it really highlights how we should be treating our heritage assets to the extent that we don't do. I guess the only other area that I'd just like to mention was we did take them also to Australiana Pioneer Village. Gay offered to keep it open for us, which was really well received, and so we did look at the vernacular buildings there as well. So that's what I can pass on.

Thank you.

Thanks, Graham. I think that's a really interesting grouping, but I think what's particularly interesting about that is that focus on cultural landscape. And one of the things that I think we've learnt from the discussions about the Richmond Bridge duplication is that lack of understanding. You're right in that we have become, I think we are complacent about what surrounds us because, for us, it's just our everyday. And it's not, I think it's those of us who've moved into the area that often see this quite starkly because we haven't grown up with it around us. But I think there is a lack of understanding of the importance of those continuing views and historical vistas that are so much part of the town planning of the Hawkesbury in its early days, and the fact that they still exist and the importance and their relationship to flooding and the development of our towns as well.

And until... I didn't understand, really, the planning of Windsor, particularly, and I think Windsor is— the plan of Windsor is quite stark, the way its topography works and the way its plans work, until Ian Jack sat me down and showed me the map. And I really got how the town was developed in relation to its topography and the flooding around the area. And until I could marry the ground with the map in my mind, I didn't really understand the significance of what we have here. I think that it would be worth documenting that tour, Graham, and potentially looking at offering that to— I'd like to see incoming councillors at the beginning of each council term do that. I think, you know, as custodians of the LGA, that's a really important thing to get.

I think it would be useful to get a bus and pop elected representatives from all levels of government on it and show them what they're actually responsible for and how that works, because I don't think that we have a really well developed understanding of just how important that is. And you're right, sometimes it does take someone internationally to O and R over what we've got before we realise that, you know, even though we are, you know, even though the history that we— the settler history is quite short compared to some other nations, it's incredibly important that we have it still so starkly written here.

Jan? Just added to that, with the village that I'm talking about, which formed the part of the town right through to almost the park. That was forms. That is also part of that flood area understanding because the reason that Rickerby started selling the tiny little lots that became the village was because of the floods. It was prior to any government recognition of this, although King had learnt and put people on higher land. But there were only three properties on the high land, and they were farms. And Rickerby owned one of them, and he realised that people were anxious to get land above the flood level. And most of the early people that bought land in 1806 came from Cornwallis, which is, you know, how that connection began.

So it wasn't quite Macquarie.

Definitely before Macquarie, but I'm not discounting the importance of Macquarie.

Any further comments?

Okay. Item 13, historical mile markers.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So there was a mile marker in Windsor Street, East Richmond that I guess was, well, deteriorated to the extent that it's no longer in place there. So we've undertaken design work and actually physically produced a replica mile marker, so we're hoping to have that installed in the very near future.

And that did lead us to a brief discussion about the marker that... That is still the original marker that still exists at Castle Ray, and how well protected that is. And so we'll undertake to visit that and see that it's as safe as possible as well.

Fourteen is a duplicate, so we'll move on to fifteen, heritage signage.

So, a lot of discussion with the previous committee in terms of the need for, you know, heritage signage. So Council has undertaken the wayfinding strategy, and obviously did get input from the Heritage Committee in terms of that wayfinding strategy, with presentations and advice from the committee provided. So Council has been successful in receiving about $2.34 million worth of funding through the West Invest project for our wayfinding strategy. So now that we have that, basically got that sort of cohesive and consistent signage strategy, I guess it really enables that smooth navigation and user-friendly signage to be rolled out. And as part of that signage is really sort of highlighting the important places, the histories and stories as part of that. So you can look to see the progress in terms of that particular project, hopefully in the near future.

We had a presentation on that at one of the first meetings of this committee, so we'll hurry up and wait on that one, but hopefully early next year.

Macquarie Towns. So this is the state listing of the Macquarie Towns.

Yep. So there's been previous presentations to the committee and to Council in terms of the Macquarie Towns and obviously, you know, the potential to state list the, I guess, the framework of the towns themselves. Officers have had discussions with the Department of Planning, or sorry, Heritage New South Wales, in terms of... Yeah, the prospects of such a listing. Obviously, they've sort of raised a number of challenges to getting such a listing in place. But I guess, yeah, as officers, we haven't really progressed it beyond that stage at this stage.

And I think in our update on the livability project previously this afternoon, we heard about some of the implications of those listings not being in place and therefore the heritage officer's considerations of the livability scope of works, where because the precincts aren't listed and the towns themselves aren't listed, there's probably less engagement from the heritage office, or only engagement with the individual state-listed items, which I think has been to our detriment. But we also heard from Jan the updates on her research of the earlier parts of the town, which I think will feed in nicely to the next stages of this project. So when you've recovered from your thesis writing, Jan, you've recovered already?

That was quick. We should probably revisit this armed with that additional information and perhaps update what we're seeking as a listing. It may give us a stronger case, or we may need to pivot slightly.

So if we park that for discussions next year, perhaps.

Any further comment on that item ? Madam Chair. I think it's fair to say the Heritage Office was not enthusiastic.

I guess, yeah, they raised a number of challenges to overcome in terms of being successful with such a listing.

Michael?

Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. I was just going to say that Heritage New South Wales has recently commissioned a heritage consultant to revisit the state listing of Braidwood, which is the entire town that has been listed. The reason for that is because when they listed that, it was a blanket listing in the whole town, and that created a bit of work for Heritage New South Wales anytime any property owner wanted to do anything. That's fueling their distaste for listing entire townscapes and landscapes again. But it's my understanding we've always been pushing for listing the street layout

And

The grid pattern, which would be up to the property boundaries themselves, taking in public land rather than private properties as such. There may be the occasional town squares, but again, it is public land. So there is a clear distinction with what the intent of the listing is for. So any chatter about not wanting to list townscapes shouldn't be on the basis that, well, that's not what we're trying to achieve, listing the entire town or townscape. No

That's never been the intention of the listing. I think that

Needs to be distinguished, and we need to bear that in mind and keep promoting that. This is about protecting the street layout and the evidence of Macquarie's town plans.

Rather than the fabric of the towns as a whole ensemble.

Yeah, and I think it is, I think perhaps the fact that it is such a nuanced listing is it might be where we're struggling to get our point across. But let's revisit that next year and see how we get on. Howe House.

Howe House. So this is basically pending a review of the existing Conservation Management Plan. And I guess the existing Conservation Management Plan had a number of recommendations that, I guess on reflection, looking at those recommendations, that it probably needed some further consideration. And I guess particularly as part of that was the existing veranda and the potential to remove that, that was highlighted as part of the Conservation Management Plan. So our Cultural Services team had applied for funding to undertake a further Conservation Management Plan. So the review is ready depending on that. I'll have to provide an update in terms of where that funding source to get to

Thanks. I think it's fair to say that that CMP was developed some time ago when some of the attitudes towards conservation were different. And I think if we were to take the Victorian era veranda off Howe House, we would probably be in for some fairly difficult discussions with the general public. So that's been, it's also work that doesn't necessarily need to be undertaken and is fairly expensive when we might be able to use that money better to preserve other parts of the building.

Heritage trails.

So in this respect, we're sort of saying ongoing and, I guess, further work is really required in terms of these heritage trail flyers, really sort of following the rollout of the wayfinding strategy that can really sort of tap into that strategy and the actual suite of signage that is delivered as part of the funding that we have been successful in.

So expect that to come back early next year, hopefully, with the wayfinding stuff , or are we waiting longer for that?

I think we're suggesting here is probably, yeah, wait for the wayfinding strategy to be rolled out and then look at the flyers after that.

Okay. Questions or comments? All right, last one: insurance of properties subject to flooding. So this is the intersection of flooding and heritage. Insurance, both vexed spaces in terms of cost and increasingly now in the last two years, availability. I think it's fair to say that this space has got worse rather than better. Andrew.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So obviously the previous heritage committee and the floodplain risk management study committee had received a briefing from the insurance council in terms of the state of play as far as the insurance industry. I guess from that, you know, there's been a lot of advocacy work that councils are undertaking in terms of, you know, those rising premiums right across the Hawkesbury Valley, particularly for flood insurance and, you know, really some astronomical increases that people have experienced. So I guess it's an ongoing advocacy role that we play in that regard. And

I think Hawkesbury Council isn't alone in that space now. And in fact, what we're seeing, where it was just not economically viable for people to purchase that insurance, people are now no longer being offered insurance. And that, I think, is a clear problem, particularly for owners of heritage properties. I did— Put out a question on notice about the number of properties we have that are no longer livable following flooding, but I haven't seen an answer to that yet . And I think there's, and I think Christopher was also following up on heritage properties that had been impacted by flooding and how many of those required additional works. I know of several already. Mary?

I had a question similar to that, which was how are we continuing to advocate around that? We no longer have a floodplain risk management committee, and of course we had that briefing back before, I think it was probably in about 2018 or 2019. So we hadn't experienced the flooding or the fire, in fact, then. I'm just wondering, in the absence of anything coming from the flood side of things, how the heritage is looking at it. And I was going to ask, were there any studies or is there any engagement with the Insurance Council around the structures of heritage buildings and how they were in fact built more to withstand floods than perhaps some of the more modern buildings? I'm just interested if that's a consideration because they do seem to be moving to more individualised assessment, and whether there are any guidelines or whether there is any input around that.

As you say, though, of course, a lot of people aren't even able to get it now, which is unfortunate. But if, I mean, there has to be something done in this space, basically, is what I think the situation is. It can't be allowed to just fizzle out because, of course, government will not pay to , in the absence of insurance, government cannot pay to restore everyone's buildings, particularly heritage buildings. And then what do we stand to lose? So I would think a heritage committee would have some power in sort of a— of approaching the insurance council to get some sort of certainty around that. I don't know if it does, but it seems like it's become a big too-hard thing for people, and I don't think that's good for our area at all.

We did discuss on the previous Heritage Advisory Committee the property owners of heritage properties being able to contact council and flood resilience being documented through the use of, say, a 149 certificate, that the owners could then show to their insurance provider . Often a broker is better in this space to show that their building is more resilient. I know some other councils have done more work on flood resilient heritage buildings. Maitland comes to mind, and there's been some additional work done in Queensland as well with the Insurance Council. I think it's probably something that we can take to the Local Government New South Wales conference again and speak to the Insurance Council is always there and speak to them again.

We did have lengthy discussions with them about the problem of very expensive insurance for heritage buildings that were flood affected, and that was before we've had four major floods. So I think we need to have that discussion again. We could next year look at having the Insurance Council come out and speak to the committee again, if we think that that's a useful way forward. I think, could we minute

That and have that done because since there's been the disasters, it's a whole different picture out there now.

Yeah, and I think we need to have, and perhaps take them on a bit of a tour of some of those impacted— yeah, some of those affected. Well, the Peninsula buildings, for example, where they've adapted very well to flooding. I mean, they've survived the 1867 flood. It's the materials in them that really affects how flood resilient they are, not the actual siting of the buildings, and I think there needs to be some further consideration. So if we could have that, if we could minute that we have— The insurance council come and meet with the committee to discuss

Insurance. Deb? Just a personal comment, I guess there. We've just been refused flood cover. And as you know, we're in Carrajong. There's no way that we're going to be part of that floodplain thing. So that's fine for us. We can just say, okay, we don't want the flood cover. But when that's the attitude, I mean, we've also been refused insurance by quite a number of companies, but the very few that'll even consider us have said, no flood cover. So it isn't as simple as what's down there. You know, when you're actually in a flood area, it's particularly difficult. But when you're not in a flood area and you're being refused, it's crazy.

So from discussions Mary and I had—do you want to do it? Because you're in the same spot.

Yeah, yeah, the same spot, literally. We got a big increase in ours, which

Was said

To be attributable to flood, because Deb and I both live on the same creek. And, yeah, I got it through someone else, but not flood. Yeah.

And when we bailed up the insurance council about it at Local Government New South Wales, or at the flood—might have been the flood conference—they basically said it was because they didn't have adequate flood mapping for that creek, and so they've just made a blanket, gosh, that's so expensive. You know, it's too risky for them to buy in, and that's what we're seeing increasingly with insurance companies, is that they're just looking at the risk and going, right, well, we're not going to enter this space. And that has big implications for heritage owners, particularly, but it also has big implications for people buying and selling, because it means that if you don't have a huge deposit when you buy your property, if you're taking out a mortgage on a property and you haven't got insurance, then there's no way a lender will touch you.

And that makes heritage properties increasingly vulnerable. I think it makes them a millstone for their owners, and that makes them really vulnerable to loss. Brian.

Yeah, Madam Chair, you would recall a meeting or a discussion organised by the federal member, Susan Templeman , that was held here at Council's former area of the hall, I should say the function centre, that's the right word. And what I took from that is that you have to have individual discussions with your insurer or through your broker, and actually identify the absolute level of the land and the flood level—sorry, not the flood level, the floor level—of your house. And you may well say, well, everything else can go as far as insurance is concerned, but from floor level up, or nominate a particular floor level up, and then go to them and barter for a premium on that sort of basis. And you would recall that some of the locals did actually present at that meeting and talked about their strategies and how they actually undertook those sorts of investigations with their insurer, but also how they made their properties more resilient.

Like

Someone down in their basement area with a kitchen, everything was movable. It was all on wheels so that they could actually put it up onto the next level. And the insurance council then, or their insurer, indicated that— You can move everything up to the next level so that, yeah , we'll insure you from that level up, but not down below. So that it's all a matter of discussion, I think. But all of this needs to be aired and made more, I guess, available, that sort of information available out in the community, because it's not out there at this point in time.

No, and I think, you know, once we do have this discussion, I think we need an information sheet for residents, and it needs to be clear on Council's website so that people can access this information readily.

Mary? We just need to know that the Insurance Council and the various insurers are still open to that sort of individualised discussion after the payouts from the recent events.

Well, perhaps if Council's going to actually, I guess, instigate this sort of discussion, then perhaps you should do it through the State and Federal Member as well. We can certainly

Invite the State and Federal Member to that discussion.

Well, they might have some particular avenues. Yeah

All right. So if we could add that to the minutes, a discussion with the Insurance Council, the State and Federal Members regarding insurance, flood insurance for heritage properties

And those of us who are flying under the radar because we're not yet listed and can therefore still get insurance, despite having rather damp cellars. All right. That brings us to the end of the updates. The good news is that we only have five items to go. No, four items to go. Don't get excited. All right.

3.1.2, the Hawkesbury— Oh, sorry, could we just have a— so we've got a few recommendations that have come out of that first item . Could I have someone move that we receive and note the information and act on those various recommendations from the committee. Jan and Michael, thanks.

Okay.

3.1.2, update on the Hawkesbury Timber Slab Barn study. I need to step down from the chair because I have a pecuniary interest. My property is listed in the Slab Barn study. Mary, are you happy to take over as chair?

Yes

I am, but I'm not moving. Thank you. And then Graham also has—

I think I have to stand down. I think, is the barn at Tarana in it?

I'll just— All right.

I don't know.

Madam Chair, obviously I do have an interest in that, but I would like to speak to it later on if I could. Talk to her. Well, the new Madam Chair.

Yes. Okay. We might allow that. This is just an update, as you will have read it, an update on the timber barn study with some potential recommendations coming out of that. We'll open it for discussion. I just had a question first up, which is for Andrew, and that is about whether there's a completion date in sight for that.

Yep. So obviously the stage were highlighted in this report. So the site visits have been completed in early August. So a total of 70 sites were inspected. 41 we couldn't get access to, and 29 it was determined that we didn't need access for those. So in terms of background histories, so 52 have been prepared and there's six to go. We're obviously using the existing histories that we do have knowledge of for the other sites. So in terms of the report, we're sort of 80% completed with the historical context and 80% with the comparative analysis. And there's going to be a number of recommendations that do come out of that. So probably anticipate, you know, realistically probably early in the new year, we might be in a position to start presenting matters to the committee in terms of this. Yeah.

Thanks, Andrew, and sorry for not referring to you to speak to it first. Thank you for doing that. Are there any comments on that from others? And then we'll — Graham, would you like to speak first with what you want to say? It might give rise to some discussion. Okay,

Thank you, Madam Chair. Look, I just wanted to clarify some of the, I guess, some of the dot points within that which actually nominate particular numbers of sites that have been visited around. I don't believe that, as a sub-consultant to the main consultant undertaking this study, I don't think those figures are quite right. And certainly our initial study, or our initial two studies, came up with 106 barns on 91 sites. So it really isn't just sort of the 89 that were identified at that time. I'm not sure about the additional 51. I think they may well have been initially proposed, but on investigation between Council's heritage officer and Otto Shahami, I think a lot of those were actually discounted because either barns didn't exist or they weren't of a timbers lab or whatever.

So those numbers are a little bit iffy, as far as I'm concerned, as part of the study. But Andrew is correct. That's where the study is at at the moment, around about 80% done

Okay, well we can get those figures clarified. I'm not sure where they came from, if they're from the consultant or from the heritage officer. But Andrew, do you know

So the officers compiled this, as I understand, on the information provided by the consultant. So we can definitely clarify those numbers for the next meeting.

Thanks, Andrew. Any further discussion on the barn study?

No? Okay. Someone to move the recommendation, which is to receive and note. Moved Shane. Seconded Cheryl. Thanks, Cheryl. All those in favour? I'm assuming everyone is. Thank you. That's carried. Thank you. Back to you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, that was quick. 3.1.3, potential heritage items project update. Andrew.

So just a report to provide progress in terms of this particular matter, and as I sort of highlighted in the first item tonight, we're sort of looking to progress those in batches of 10 to 20 and present those to the working group. So we're all up, we're looking at approximately 309 additional items, which if you add the new Barns sites, which we think is around 60, so we're talking about 370 new listings all up as part of those two tranches of work, if you like. And as I say, we're setting up a meeting of the working group prior to the end of 2023 to basically work through those batches of 10 to 20 draft inventory sheets to get the working group's, I guess, considered opinions on those draft sheets.

Questions or comments?

Great.

Madam Chair, we're getting 10 to 20 every time we meet. How long is this going to take then to do the 360-odd or whatever?

That would depend on how often we meet.

According to the mayor, Madam Chair, you can call a meeting of the heritage committee any time you like.

Yes, and that was news to me, I must say. And when I conferred with the general manager, she said that that was indeed not the case.

Andrew?

So I guess highlight that it is a working group that we're seeking the input from, so the working groups can meet when required, and when we have, I guess, sufficient information and material that we can put in front of the working group. So what we're, I guess, suggesting is that probably the frequency of those working group meetings is likely to ramp up as we progress with those various batches of those 10 to 20 listings.

Good. Well, I think we'll look forward to those. Some of them have been a very, very long time coming, and certainly not through the fault of any of the current players in that space. So that will be a really valuable and welcome addition to Council's heritage listings, I think. Any further comments on that item? 3.1.4— oh, sorry, can we have someone move and second that? We're just receiving and noting, I think.

Michelle and a seconder, please. Graham, thank you.

3.1.4, the Windsor Bridge artefacts working group. Would you like me to speak to that, seeing Thomas isn't here?

I'll do a very brief introduction and then maybe hand over. Yeah. So obviously the artefacts working group has had its second meeting, and basically the presentation, the agenda, and terms of reference that was considered by that working group, we've included in the business papers for this particular meeting. And then I guess, so in terms of that, your meeting.

Sure. So we've had a couple of meetings now, and I think one of the things that people were most keen to get information on was what we had in terms of artefacts and where they were stored, because of course the next phase of that is what we're going to do with them in terms of both protecting and showcasing those items. And so in this business paper is a copy of the slides that were shown to the working group. Now this is a public document. You're free to take this and show it to other people who are interested in this space, and let them know what Council has stockpiled. The majority of it is that they're largely in two locations. The stuff that isn't stored at the museum is either at the Wilberforce Depot or at the East Kurrajong Depot.

Some of it is—there's quite a lot of stuff, particularly bricks and sandstone. There are bags and bags of bricks, lots of stuff stored in containers. But there's also quite a bit of stuff that's sitting outside, and there was some concern about the deterioration, particularly of the metal parts and parts that have been successfully preserved in the river that are now no longer going to survive well long term oxidising in a paddock. So the staff undertook to go and find out whether they can at least be covered and stored in... And perhaps in the containers or under better protection. We referred earlier this afternoon to some of the sandstone that has been recovered as part of this project, and we will need to make decisions about whether the provenance of that sandstone, because it's a mixed lot, and also whether it can be reused for repair in other parts of Windsor and Richmond, or whether it will be part of a standalone project .

We also talked about where we could do some sort of interpretive project or showcasing project for all of this stuff that showed off both its value to Windsor as part of Windsor's history, and also its value to engineering as part of Australia's history. These are quite—the bridge was quite a remarkable structure in terms of its engineering and for its era, and so showcasing that whilst protecting the items and not having them turn into some sort of folly or ongoing , you know, nuisance, or, yeah, I think is the next quite difficult part that the committee will—that the working group will grapple with. We talked about maybe joining forces with one of the universities and both the civil engineering and the heritage sections of one of the universities, whether they'd be interested in a partnership where we could possibly display, trying to keep things as close as possible to the site.

The part, the role that the museum and cultural services can play in that space, given the limited space in those facilities and given the size and scale of some of these. You know, these are large pieces of civil engineering history. It's not something we can stick in a cupboard, you know, or on a bookshelf in the museum. So I think we did also talk about the potential for fragments and things like council did with Colo Bridge, and I think that's been slated for further discussion as well. Does anyone have anything to add? Many of you were there. I've had COVID in the interim and I may not have as much brain as I had before I went into the space, so it would be lovely if someone could fill in the gaps.

Mary's got light on and then Graham.

And I can't fill in the gaps because I wasn't there, but I've got a question. The first thing is, how old's the rope ladder?

Oh, the rope ladder's really interesting. So can anyone remember the exact age of the rope ladder? It was when they built the caissons. So what

Year was that? I don't— sorry, I can't answer in terms of the age, but it was the ladder that they used to go down into the caissons and put the bricks around the outside. So it was, it's, yeah, inside

The caissons

So people actually — So if it was 1874, it was open, so it would have been

It's written up in the paper, the caissons, being the date, so it's probably '73.

So 1874 anyway.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay, that's amazing that it looks in, from the photos it looks like it's in quite good condition.

Storing it is— so currently that's stored under controlled atmosphere conditions in the museum, and likely to remain that way. So if we were to display that ladder, it would probably have to be a replica of the ladder with the original only for very limited access for historical education purposes, because

It's so fragile. Right. So I'm just thinking on my feet at the moment, which is a dangerous thing, actually. Well, at least you're sitting down. I'm just wondering how much of this is— I know a lot has to be stored under controlled condition and so on. I'm just wondering if there's any scope, given that we had our previous discussion around the livability and what to do with that entryway around Thompson Square and where the eateries are, is any of this able to be incorporated into that so that we have something remaining in that precinct? I don't know if that's feasible because I can't tell from the photos how, you know, how vulnerable any of it is or how structurally, you know, how the integrity of the steel walkway beams, for example.

But, you know, I would hate to think we missed an opportunity where we're making something publicly that we could have perhaps incorporated. I understand that would probably be a very expensive exercise in terms of design or whatever. But can we just— I don't know. Throw that, as the project is so delayed now anyway, that we can perhaps look at that as any potential reuse that would have the dual function of building a new structure and, of course, showcasing something of what was actually from that precinct. I

Think it's certainly a worthwhile discussion to have, and the working group has—that's our next phase, I think, we've flagged—is to discuss what to do with that stuff. And certainly the closer to the original location of the bridge, the better for those artifacts. And some of them are quite robust. I mean, they're big concrete caissons, and they're solid steel walkway beams, and getting some engineering advice as to how robust they are in terms of reuse for some sort of structural reuse is the next logical step. The other interesting bits and pieces that we had are the formed bricks that were laid down inside the caissons, and getting some sort of display that really talks about the human cost and the human involvement in that really extraordinary—you know, the fact that we sent children down into those caissons to build that structure into the bed of the river.

In a different environment, though They couldn't just be exposed.

No, some of them are quite— that's the information that we're getting, that we've asked for, is how robust some of those materials actually are and whether they can be reused in some other way. So the bricks in the caseons appear to be fired and are quite strong. It's the other bricks out of Thompson Square that some of those aren't. And so we've had some discussions about bricks, and we've all had samples of bricks.

Always interesting And the other thing would be about the integrity of the sandstone. I guess that's being checked for any potential reuse, because a lot of that looks like sizes that would need cutting to be used. So

They're quite large Some of the questions around the sandstone relate to the provenance and the wall that has come down from on the terrace, rather than— so it hasn't come out of the Thompson Square precinct. It's come out, which is from the old— there's two sources: the mill and the brewery sites, Cadell's Brewery. And so we need to identify where they've come from originally, and that will have some role in determining reuse as well. Okay. Graham.

Thanks, Madam Chair. I guess I've been doing a little bit of thinking about these artifacts, and because they're so big and how to actually display them in an appropriate way, Council has the advantage of owning Australiana Pioneer Village, and that has a fair bit of area. I know it floods, but so does the bridge flood, or has flooded many, many times. So I guess I see that there would be an opportunity to actually do something. Meaningful in that sort of location. I know it's not in Thompson Square, but there could certainly be a couple of displays, one within the museum to the extent that they can cater for, but then with notation that, you know, further displays out at APV and direct people to Council's other tourist attraction.

I guess I'd see no other value in sending it anywhere else other than that, because then it stays within a Council building or Council site, and it can be administered. And if they need to build a structure, then build a structure to house it under.

And certainly that was raised in the meeting as well, and I think it's one of the advantages of the Pioneer Village and Jan's very clever heritage listing of the village is as not just as a collection of buildings, but as an open-air museum that shows the Hawkesbury's early history. And so it does have potential, I think, certainly to house more of the vulnerable parts of Hawkesbury's history as Sydney expands over the top of us inevitably. We did talk about going out to perhaps some sort of design competition for engineering students or town planning students through one of the universities to look at reuse that would be beneficial for both telling the story of the bridge and the artefacts, but also I think it would be useful rather than just providing a structure and a folly, that we provide something that is useful for the community in perpetuity as well.

You know, losing the bridge was a tragedy. It would be good if we could have something that was workable and provided something for the community long term besides just going, well, that was a nice bit of our heritage that we didn't manage to maintain.

Further comments?

Graham. I was just having one further comment, and that was if you are looking at involved in the university, obviously the engineering section would be the, or the engineering department would be the obvious one to go to, seeing as it wasn't an engineering, not a marvel, but an engineering step in Australia's history. And they may well be best placed to showcase it.

Michael.

Thanks, Madam Chair. I was just going to say that we talked about the heritage interpretation strategy, which Mary speaks to what you were commenting on, identifying what the stock is that we have, and then what is the significance of that. What could you actually do with it, and how can we tell those stories? What are the key themes and messages that need to be conveyed? And then looking at how can we interpret that. Is it through some sort of sculpture or interpretive signage? Is it through a display of those resources and relics? Is it a part reconstruction or some sort of park installation? Is it just putting them on display in the Pioneer Village or in the museum and gallery itself? That's really the first point, is to look at that and take stock of what we've got.

But taking it back one step, a lot of it is sitting out in the open at the moment, and in different locations. And so what is really important as a starting point is to consolidate it so it's all in one repository and make it safe, and to take some protective measures as an interim to at least put a tarp over some of the objects that are sitting out in the open so that they are protected from the elements while we determine what do we do with them. Do we salvage and retain every piece or a select representation of that? And then making sure that there are toolbox talks with the works people at the depot, so they know what is under that tarp, that they're not tempted to inadvertently remove it or destroy it or get rid of it or pilfer it.

And so there's that awareness, and they can take ownership of it as well. But that was really the first starting point,

Madam Chair

Taking stock with what we've got, keeping it all together and protecting it so that we can determine what do we do with it so that it doesn't continue to deteriorate in the meantime.

Has that been implemented?

We certainly discussed it with the—we certainly discussed it because at the moment this is really in the hands of the Cultural Services staff, and so there's a difficulty there in that the Cultural Services staff are the ones who are looking into what happens with it. It's the museum staff who've got the key interest, but it's all at the depot, which is not normally where the museum staff hang out. So, which goes to Michael's point of having those talks. So, Michael, would you like to put forward a recommendation from the—because the working group can't make a recommendation, the Heritage Committee can. Michelle?

Can I just add, too, the time in between the artifacts actually going off-site and what's happening, it's already quite a delay, so you wouldn't want to delay it much further if things needed to be covered over

Yeah. So, Michael, would you like to make a recommendation to the Council regarding immediate stocktake and protection of the artifacts and education of the depot staff regarding the preservation and control of those items?

Yep. Do you want me to put some words together? That would be lovely

Yeah,

Thank you. Yeah, well, I would recommend that the Council takes immediate action to undertake an inventory of what we have, or what Council has in their possession, what the provenance of that is in terms of where it's come from to what we know, and where it currently sits. And then I would be making the recommendation that Council considers urgently taking measures to protect that by consolidating it to one repository . And taking measures to put protective coverings in place, whether it is putting them in the shipping containers at the depot, or a temporary tarp over it to make safe and watertight as an interim. The second part of that recommendation, the third part of that recommendation, would be to undertake a series of toolbox talks with the depot staff and team so that they're aware of what the material is, the significance of the material, and the importance of protecting it, as treating that as an education campaign so that they are more aware and they can take ownership of that.

The fourth part would then be for Council to commission a heritage interpretation strategy involving heritage consultants to assess that material and to look at what opportunities there are for interpretation, and then provide that report to Council.

Thank you. You'll move that. Can I have a seconder, please?

Madam Chair, before we actually move that, can I actually ask Michael to remove the word tarp? I think it should just be a protective covering , and the reason for that is that Council's barn, which is over here in Pitt Street, Tebbutt Street, wherever it is, has been dismantled as far as its roof is concerned, and all of the timber is sort of stacked within the building, and there's a tarp over it, which is now in shreds and probably has been for months and months and months, and so... Yes , we can put a tarp over it, but it's not going to stay inert for very long, and it's just going to sit there. No

I agree entirely, and I would be happy to reword that and suggest that Council takes the necessary measures to put adequate protective coverings in place, be it a temporary structure or using the, I mentioned, the shipping containers that are on the depot site, and to better arrange the material in those shipping containers so that they can be stacked and stored. Does that satisfy you, Graham? Yes, that's fine.

So Michael's moved that. Can I have a seconder, please? That'll be you, Graham, I think.

Any further comments, Cheryl?

Just in relation, and I support Michael's motion. Also in the meeting, it was in regard to the engineering significance of the artefacts, it was agreed in the meeting to seek some engineering feedback or advice on that and on the significance, and to invite some civil engineers, including Guy Boncardo, to actually view the items and so on. So that was also agreed in the working

Group. And I think that will come—that's going to be part of the next meeting

I believe so. I believe that that's ongoing,

And so that will come back to this committee after, as a further update from the working group. So this space isn't finished yet. Jan?

I just think that it should be part of the motion because you mentioned having... What did you say? Consultants look at the heritage

Impact

And in some ways it's the engineering people that will have more impact in terms of understanding it. So I think it needs to be part of the motion that it will be also engineering expertise.

Sure, yeah. There needs to be an appropriate team. It's not just one discipline that needs to consider that. I agree, yes .

So I'll just ask the minute secretary and Andrew if that is clear as mud in terms of a recommendation to come back to Council.

I think, yeah, between Amy and myself, I think we'll have enough to formulate that. Yes. Yes. Goodo. Yep.

Thank God for the tape. Right. Graham?

Yeah, just one further thing. There was two engineers that were giving advice to COR, when the whole Windsor Bridge replacement project was going on, and they were very familiar with the significance of these items. And I just wonder if an invitation might be valuable to go to them as part of the team that does that assessment.

So one was Guy Boncardo, and one of the other gentlemen has died. I don't think that

Passed . I think one of them passed away. Yeah, one. Yeah,

Ray Wedgewood actually was one of them who gave advice to the Upper House Inquiry. He actually passed away. His collaborator in that, the name escapes me at the moment, and I'm not sure, you know, where he would be now. Guy Boncardo was actually involved in more on-the-ground advice and so on. He has actually has a— Has a colleague, a former colleague, who is the chair of the Engineers Australia Heritage Committee, and his name is Michael Clark. And Guy and Michael work closely and still, you know, are in close consultation. So, yeah. We can follow that up,

Both of those.

Madam Chair, there is another heritage engineer that has done a lot of work throughout New South Wales and elsewhere in Australia, and that's Simon Wiltshire. He's now retired, but used to be with Hughes Truman Ludlow, I think, and also an international company that took them over. But Simon might be a valuable person because he was actually also a member of the Heritage Council fabric working group as well.

Right. So if you've got contact details of either of those people, that would be useful if you could forward them to the staff. We could get them involved in the next round of discussions.

Because I think we, I mean, this was

A state heritage listed item before the state significance overruled that listing. This is a significance to the people of Australia, not just the Hawkesbury. Brian Pearson. Sorry? Brian Pearson. Thank you.

Okay. So we have a lengthy motion that we will get right, but— Has those four components. Is everyone, so I've got a mover and a seconder. Is everyone happy with that recommendation? And then there will be an additional receive and note the information given, and I think probably a fifth point, recommendations for the engineers for, excuse me, engineering heritage experts for further consultation. Is everyone happy to move forward there ? Okay. So next item, and please.

Feel free to show the information that's in the business paper to interested parties. I know there's been a lot of concern about these items. So the more we can get this information out, and the fact that it is stored at Council, that these items exist and that Council holds them, the more public that knowledge is, frankly, the safer those artefacts are where they are.

Local Heritage Assistance Fund, 3.15.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So providing an update to the committee on the 23-24 Assistance Fund, there will be a report to Council, Council's meeting next week to determine which applications are supported. But encouragingly, we've got a record number of applicants again under this program, and it's a program that's sort of gone from strength to strength each year. And obviously the Heritage Committee has provided a lot of advice in the past in terms of how the program's run and promoted and ways to encourage increased use or applications as part of each year's program. So, as I say, a record number of applicants there in, I think, 33 we ended up with, and they're sort of spread across the LGA, but I guess primary sort of concentrations in and around Richmond, Windsor, Pitt Town and the McDonald Valley, for a variety of works, includes internal repairs, including ceilings, fencing, cladding and roofs and gutters.

So some of those really sort of primary issues that do come up, the roofs and gutters in particular, to protect heritage items. So it does mean that we're actually oversubscribed in terms of our budget allocation for the fund, but— We've recommended a waiver for Council to approve as many of those applicants as possible. And so after Council's consideration next week, we'll update the committee in terms of where the final numbers that were approved and the various details of the projects.

And I will, when it comes to Council next week, Graham, make your point that the fund is not large enough, and we have brought that to Council recently , that there isn't enough money in the pot, and that money doesn't go very far either. You know, that $2,000 from Council doesn't buy— anyone who's bought paint recently knows how little paint $2,000 buys, for example. It certainly doesn't buy a lot of roofing iron. While it may encourage people to hang on to their historic fabric, the pittance that's available and the increasing costs, it does make it harder and harder, I think, for heritage owners to maintain properties with increasing costs. But we will make that point, and we will try to get more blood out of the stone.

I've got a couple of— I've got one cunning plan, but I'll wait and see what— I haven't seen what's— I haven't seen the business paper yet to see whether my cunning plan is feasible. So I won't talk about it now, lest it falls apart. Any comments on this item?

Madam Chair, through you, if I can make a recommendation to Andrew. Obviously, it's likely that it will be oversubscribed and not everybody will be successful in getting funding. Trying to find a positive out of that and assist those property owners who have applied, instead of writing a letter back and saying, You've not been successful, could Council give consideration to treating that as a minor works exemption and perhaps getting Chris Reeves to look at it and, if in agreement with those works... Treat that as an approval to go ahead and do those minor works so that they can at least get something positive out of that, rather than have to start from scratch again with further communication with Council.

Andrew?

Yeah, so I guess what we've recommended to Council is we'll actually, you know, if Council does proceed with that recommendation, is the vast majority of those applicants will be approved, if subject to Council's consideration of that. But there are a number that we haven't recommended are supported. But yeah, we can certainly, it won't just be a letter of, you were unsuccessful. We can work with those particular owners in terms of the best way forward for them.

Any further comment? It's worth noting that back when I was first elected in 2016, we were literally, and I'm not joking when I say this, pulling people in off the street to come to information sessions to get them, begging people to apply for this funding so that the pot didn't dry up. So to find ourselves, you know, six years on, post floods and fires and COVID, to find ourselves oversubscribed, I think is a real testament to what both this committee and Council staff has done to elevate the approach to heritage across the LGA. And that's a really positive outcome. Six years feels like a long time on Council and actually isn't very much. So that's a big turnaround that people are starting to really value these properties and want to pour some money and effort into them rather than just hoping they'd go away.

The other thing that this does, that this program does, is get our heritage advisor onto properties. This is the carrot for heritage listing and for increasing education for people with heritage properties so that they make really good positive additions to their properties rather than doing, you know, some of the awful things that we've seen done in the past, taking out windows, replacing them with windows of the wrong shape and fabric, loss of, you know, short sheet roofing iron to light gauge, you know, long sheet coloured Colorbond, things like that. So it makes a real difference. You know, hopefully stopping people putting concrete into their sandstone foundations and various other bits and pieces. You know, these are all big steps forward in protecting the heritage of the area.

Shall we receive a note, Graham?

I just wanted to add one more thing, and I guess I've said it before. The council really needs to get their list of heritage items recognised at the correct level. You know, we can see that if they're only at local level, then you're going to get $2,000 at absolute maximum in any year. But if they're at state level, then you're actually able to proceed to New South Wales funding, which is a bigger pot. Sure, it's still a competition, but it's a bigger pot and worthwhile considering going for. But it does need council to actually embark on the correct studies and to get things happening, I guess, for individual owners and to respect them.

Would you like to add that to the recommendation, Graham? Yes, thank you. Okay, so the recommendation, firstly, will be to receive and note the report,

And the second recommendation is that Council consider resourcing studies that ensure that heritage items are listed at the right level so that owners are better supported in their funding, better supported financially. Are you happy with that? Can I have a seconder for that, please?

Thanks, John.

All in favour? Excellent. All right. So the final item is general business. I've got one. Does anyone else have any other items for general business?

So, Graham, I thought that it might be useful to put the item that you raised in the item before, which is the barn near Tebbitts Observatory, and ask that an update on the condition and the protection slash conservation slash restoration of that barn come back to the committee, please. And then we can perhaps make some recommendations regarding.

Madam Chair, not to try and pre-empt the result of that study, but this particular barn is up there as far as Australia's significance is concerned, so that the protection of that timber fabric, which is just rotting, is of paramount importance.

So that's why I've asked for it to come back to us so that you can, if you've got information that you could send through to the staff about the importance of that, that we could add to that recommendation. Because we'll discuss that as a standalone item and then hopefully have some recommendations come back from there. Because again, it's one of those things, I think if we don't raise it and make recommendations, then we won't expect that anything further is done with that site. So I think, you know, it behoves us to bring it forward.

The other thing I wanted to mention, Madam Chair, if the committee will indulge me, is that the barn that has suffered with the last flood, the one in Freemans Reach at the corner, 65 Freemans Reach Road, that's falling into the river.

I think I mentioned earlier on that it's certainly within documentation and a flood map of 1816, so it was actually built prior to that. But the historian has actually come up with another artwork which actually indicates that it may well be pre-1800. Now, I don't have the details of that as yet, but if that's the case, then it's probably got to be the earliest barn in Australia that still remains, and unless there's some other one that comes up. So it's really of importance, and it really bugs me that the Heritage Office, in representation to them for some emergency funding, said no, but also to dismantle it and move it to higher ground. Like, what a joke that is when there's no higher ground anyway, and it's a barn of that significance.

So, Graham, would you like, if you've got that information, could you perhaps refer that to Christopher , and it could come back for further discussion. We can come up with some ways forward at the next committee meeting, perhaps, Council, or would you like to make recommendations now that Council explore that and that Council make recommendations to the Heritage Office for further protection, knowing that they will probably say no?

Oh, look, I think it's probably, well, it's a no-brainer that it will be of state significance, and it may well come out as being capable of reaching national significance. And if that's the case, then that's another big deal. But I would actually wait until that's the case, and hopefully no other substantial event will occur to cause its demise or further demise. So I think, yeah, once we've actually coupled the significance, the true significance of these items, then we'll just leave it at the moment.

Okay, so you just want to flag it as an issue. Is the owner sympathetic?

Oh, the owner's been most sympathetic when we actually originally wrote to the Heritage Office probably, I don't know, 12 months ago now almost. They actually wanted to conserve the barn, but they've been working on the riverbank since then as their funds permit. But I'm not sure exactly how far that's gone yet. But the barn is subsiding further and further, as you can see from the roof alignment, and it sort of distresses me when I pass it every day.

Yeah, there's bits of— there's roads in the Hawkesbury that I struggle to drive down at the moment. The loss is just so extraordinary.

And on that cheerful note, does anyone have any further general business? Jan?

I just want to get some feedback on where to go with this village proposal that I have from here. I'm not sure how many people here have actually seen my paper , or whether I need to distribute it further, and also how we, if there's some way we can put it to this committee to recommend to Council that it be taken seriously and incorporated in the signage that will proceed for Windsor.

Jan, would you like to give a presentation to the committee? Perhaps we could do it— I'm not sure how much business we've got on the business paper for November. So we could either do it during the meeting if we haven't got too much on, or we could do an earlier presentation like we did with the liveability this afternoon. Is that workable for people, or does that interfere with people's work, other outside work? If we were to start, say, at four o'clock and do a half-hour or 45-minute presentation and discussion. That would be wonderful. I'd love that.

Just put your light on, Jan. Sorry, I'm anxious to get it forwarded so it can be looked at formally by

Council staff. So I think we're due to meet the 2nd of November, is that right? So if we, if we say meet from 4 p.m. for that presentation first, and then we can roll into the committee meeting at 5, if everyone's happy with that.

Then we can, that gives us a bit more time, I think, to have a proper discussion and to think about next steps before the end of the year.

Any further comment? No other items? No? All right, I'll declare the meeting closed at 6.52. Thank you all for coming, and I'll see you next month for more exciting adventures of Council's Heritage Committee. Unless I see you earlier than that at an artifacts working group or something.